15 individuals who engaged, or attempted to engage, with the UN human rights mechanismsCases
- Location of case in SG report
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- Assistant Secretary-General
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- Dates of prior UN action
- December 2019; May 2019
- Type of record
- Unnamed individual/group/organization
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- Was the victim a minor?
- Was the victim a civil servant, member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- Reported trigger of reprisal
engaged, or attempted to engage, with the UN human rights mechanisms, including through attending trainings
- Engagement with UN body
- Type of attempted engagement
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- from June 2019 to April 2020
- Reprisal information
from June 2019 to April 2020 there were new incidents involving 15 individuals who engaged, or attempted to engage, with the UN human rights mechanisms, including through attending trainings. Reprisals reportedly included arrest, detention, ill-treatment while in detention, forcible disappearance into “residential surveillance at a designated location,” travel bans and confiscation of passports, seizure of property, interrogation and surveillance.
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Property damage/raid/search/confiscation
- Physical attack: Torture/Cruel, inhuman, degrading treatment
- Travel restriction
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- Government response dates
- 17 August 2020
- Government response content
stated that judicial authorities deal with cases in accordance with the law and protect the rights of each and every criminal suspect or defendant. There is no so-called retaliation. The Government expressed its strong dissatisfaction with and firm opposition to the use of unconfirmed information and distortion of the efforts to crack down on illegal and criminal activities in accordance with the law. The Government urged OHCHR to stop interfering in countries’ internal affairs and judicial sovereignty.
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?